Jul
19
2014
14

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Democrats will exceed expectations. …Heh. Maybe they will.

Shot:

Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the strength of individual candidates will help her party outperform expectations in the upcoming midterms.

“Pundits are wildly misinterpreting or over interpreting,” the Florida Democrat said, specifically responding to a projection published by the Washington Post that gives Republicans an 86 percent chance of taking control of the Senate.

“Models don’t elect candidates. Voters do,” she said, speaking at a Thursday morning event organized by centrist Democratic think tank Third Way.

(more…)

Jul
17
2014
4

I encourage Senate Democrats to go to the wall to bring back IRS bonuses.

I absolutely encourage them:

The House on Wednesday approved legislation that would prohibit performance bonuses for senior executives at the Internal Revenue Service.

Rep. Paul Gosar’s (R-Ariz.) amendment to the fiscal 2015 Financial Services appropriations bill was approved on a 282-138 vote, with one member voting present.

(more…)

May
23
2014
4

Senate Democrats are only *theoretically* interested in fixing the VA scandal.

Dagnabbit, Jim Geraghty got to this story before I did*:

Senate Democrats are closing ranks behind Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki and President Obama’s decision to keep him in the cabinet despite Republican calls for his ouster.

As of Thursday afternoon, not a single Democratic senator had called for Shinseki’s resignation.

And Senate Democrats have been slow to embrace House-passed legislation that would give Shinseki the authority to fire senior executives.

(more…)

May
20
2014
12

Democratic donors discovering Obama is just marking time until 2017.

I find stories like this to be perversely fascinating:

Top Democratic donors say they are exasperated by a lack of leadership from the White House on policy and are questioning whether they should throw money into midterm elections they believe won’t change Washington.

…mostly because I invariably end up asking myself, How do ‘top Democratic donors’ manage to make money when they apparently spend all their time in deep comas? Seriously: if you’ve taken this long to figure out that Barack Obama is bored by his job, doesn’t do any part of it that he absolutely doesn’t have to, and can’t be bothered to show consideration to others… then I don’t know. Maybe you shouldn’t give money to Democrats. Instead, give money to me.





(more…)

May
03
2014
4

Iowa Democrats mulling ensuring election fraud in 2016 primary caucuses.

Otherwise known as ‘voting over the Internet.’

Iowa Democrats are mulling a slate of ways to boost participation in their next presidential caucuses, including permitting Internet voting, a controversial method that would mark the first time in history the web is utilized to cast an official ballot preference for president.

I look forward with some interest to see how that experiment works out for them. And for the screams of horror and despair, of course.

Moe Lane

PS: I do not expect Mickey Mouse or [whatever Howard Stern suggests] to win the 2016 Democratic Iowa caucus.  I simply no longer think that such a thing can be ruled out.

Apr
21
2014
3

Absent Factor X, the Democrats are not going to get back the House this year.

Articles like this are very helpful. For Republicans: “Is there anyway Democrats can win the 17 seats they need to capture the House majority this November? In one word: Yes.”

In several hundred words: no, not really.

Juan Williams is pretty much stuck with arguing generalities and gerrymandering. The first is used to assure his readers that the American people clearly love the Democrats more, while the latter is used to explain away that pesky problem that said American people have been apparently hate-voting the GOP into power since 2010. But it’s probably wise on Mr. Williams’ part, given that when actual numbers come into play things get sticky: “In the 2012 House races Democrats won 50.6 percent of America’s votes with a popular President Obama at the top of the ballot.” (more…)

Apr
09
2014
2

NRSC: Why aren’t Democratic Senators practicing what they preach on Equal Pay?

Yeah, I know.  Fine: replace ‘NRSC’ with ‘Moe Lane’ and pretend that I asked the original question.  Because I’d like to know the answer, too:

The NRSC pulled the official payroll records for Democrat Senator offices and calculated the average pay for men and women for the most recent 6 month period available. Here’s what we found:

· Mark Udall pays women 91 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
· Mary Landrieu pays women 88 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
· Mark Begich pays women 82 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
· Mark Warner pays women 75 cents for every dollar that a man makes.
· Gary Peters pays women 67 cents for every dollar that a man makes.

On average, these five Democrats on the ballot in battleground states pay women in their office 80 cents for every dollar made by a male employee.

(more…)

Mar
26
2014
5

Democrats not doing well with this permanent majority thing.

If I was a Democratic strategist, these Gallup poll crosstabs would be giving me conniptions, fits, and the galloping staggers:

gallup-demographics

(more…)

Mar
26
2014
6

This is not an actual, *official* use of the D-word.

But it could be.

Point:

Counterpoint:

Mar
24
2014
8

Greenies mucking up Democrats’ Senate hopes.

Your daily dose of Democrats eating their own*:

‘Downton Abbey’ Democrats May Cost their Party the Senate

When it comes to green gentry liberalism, think of an Americanized version of the PBS hit—where everyone knows his or her place, and our betters look best.

Last week was a good week for natural gas, but a bad one for green gentry liberalism.   John Podesta, a veteran of the Clinton White House who is once again a presidential adviser, tried to explain some energy facts of life to the true-believing liberal base. Still, it’s unclear if Podesta’s intended audience was listening, and that willful blindness may cost the Democrats control of the Senate.

(more…)

Mar
22
2014
3

The Democratic party’s devolution on the values of military service.

Remember how, from 2001 to 2006 or so, the Democrats kept screaming about “chickenhawking?” – Oh, yes, the Left has been re-purposing homophobic slurs for some time: they used that term to attack anybody who supported the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but did not actually serve.  It went nowhere, of course: your average anti-war type not only does not understand the concepts of ‘democracy’ and ‘America;’ he can’t actually spell them* – but it was nonetheless a phenomenon.  To the point where John Kerry spent the 2004 election apparently answering every question with a reminder that, hey, he served in Vietnam. Crazy, I know, but that was the thing then.

And what’s the thing now?  Declaring that war veterans are out of touch with America and shouldn’t run for office. (more…)

Mar
20
2014
4

FL-13 Fallout Watch: Two Democratic House candidates drop out this week.

(H/T: AoSHQ) The two were Mike Parrish in PA-06 (Lean Republican) and Buffie McFadyen in CO-0[3] (Safe Republican). Of the two, obviously Parrish is the more disappointing news for Democrats… but it’s interesting to note that ‘R+5′ is apparently enough to be effectively out of the realm of possibility for Democrats this cycle anyway.  I remember a time when it was not, and that time was 2006 and 2008.

I know, I know, it’s vaguely minor news and everything.  But if you’re wondering why people are making certain assumptions about the 2014 election cycle, it’s because of stories like these.  You look at who is running, who is retiring, who is staying out of races, who is jumping in… money, too, of course, but money tends to get cancelled out by other money.  In the end, the people running are the biggest part of this picture.  To mangle Machiavelli… gold may not get you good candidates, but good candidates can always get you gold. (more…)

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by TheBuckmaker.com